pure potency (prime matter) and pure actuality (God) are strikingly similar
both are devoid of all ontological determination, including restrictive natures. the only difference is that prime matter *lacks* ontological determination, whereas God surpasses it
both are devoid of all ontological determination, including restrictive natures. the only difference is that prime matter *lacks* ontological determination, whereas God surpasses it
🔥6
there’s this tendency to use Neoplatonic influence as a measure of theological corruption. you see this in debates between palamites and certain catholics where each race to accuse the other of Neoplatonism as if this association is supposed to delegitimize the other side. it’s very gay. there’s nothing wrong with taking in insights from Neoplatonism and integrating them within a Christian, patristic picture of the world. in fact the influence I’d argue is quite enriching
🔥5
when aquinas says essence & existence are distinct he isn’t meaning to portray the relationship as between two conjoining atoms in a chemical formula but as between an otherwise unlimited reality (existence) and the principle whereby it becomes limited (essence)
🤮1
while nature, form, and essence can legitimately be used interchangeable it’s an error to conflate them. each refer to substance but under different aspects of intelligibility. nature is substance as the principle or source of a thing’s operations, teleological inclinations, or perfective activity. form is that whereby a substance receives its substantiality. and essence is substance insofar as it presents as intelligible, under the principles of form and matter
it’s amusing that the ones who say VII is heretical in saying the true Church “subsists in” the Catholic Church claim to be rigid thomists when a real thomist would interpret “subsists in” as “existing wholly and by itself within”, which is radically exclusionary
The Church has absolutely no competency whatsoever to judge whether this or that official seized power legitimately. This is entirely outside the scope of faith or morals, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Whether the election was stolen or not is a matter entirely discernible through natural reason, and if it was as we all know it was, we have no moral duty whatsoever to extend deference to the usurpers
Forwarded from Nicholas J. Fuentes
refusing/condemning the vaccine should never under any circumstances be considered disobedience to the Pope’s authority. all he did was declare it licit, and his support for it is outside the framework of what could even in principle fall under the scope of his justification
🔥1
One implication of divine liberty in my view has trinitarian implications. If God was not compelled to create, then under a scenario in which He did not choose to create, He would still of necessity have to be active on account of His nature as pure actuality. But since every activity presupposes an end, the only end to speak of would be none other than Himself. And so there must be some sense of self-relational divine ad intra activity considered wholly anterior to the possibility of ad extra Creation. As I plan to discuss in my next video on the topic, this does not constitute a rational proof for the Trinity but does indicate the Trinity’s tendency to alleviate otherwise insoluble rational difficulties that ensue from pondering divine attributes.
If the Biden admin doesn’t wake people up on transgenderism throughout the course of the next four years I am convinced next to nothing will https://twitter.com/drdavidsamadi/status/1351515589072846848?s=21
Twitter
Dr. David Samadi, MD
Joe Biden just picked Dr. Rachel Levine of Pennsylvania to be his Assistant Health Secretary. What are your thoughts on the pick?